THE WITNESS OF PHILOLOGY. 333 



words over denotative words, or even over reccptually conno- 

 tative words of a low order of extension. Nay, we have seen 

 that the leading principles of grammatical form adn:it of 

 being acquired by the child together with his acquisition of 

 words of all kinds, and that even talking birds are able to 

 distinguish between names as severally names of objects, 

 qualities, states, or actions. 



Thus we find that to almost any order of intelligence 

 which is already surrounded by the medium of spoken 

 language, the understanding — and, in the presence of any 

 power of imitative utterance, the acquisition — of denotative 

 names as signs or marks of corresponding objects, qualities, 

 &c., is, if anything, a more primitive act than that of using a 

 sentence-word ; but that in the absence of such an already- 

 existing medium, sentence-words are more primitive than 

 denotative names. Nevertheless, it is of importance to note 

 how low an order of receptual ideation is capable of learning 

 a denotative name by special association, because this fact 

 proves that as soon as mankind advanced to the stage where 

 they first began to coin their sentence-words, they must 

 already have been far above the psychological level required 

 for the acquisition of denotative words, if only such words had 

 previously been in existence. Consequently, we can well under- 

 stand how such words would soon have begun to come into 

 existence through the habitual employment of sentence-words 

 in relation to particular objects, qualities, states, actions, &c. ; 

 by such special associations, sentence-words would readily 

 degenerate into merely semiotic marks. How long or how 

 short a time this genesis of relatively "empty words" out of 

 the primordially "full words" may have occupied, it is now 

 impossible to say ; but the important thing for us to notice 

 is, that during the whole of this time — whatever it ma>- have 

 been — the mind of primitive man was already far above the 

 psychological level which is required for the apprehension 

 of a denotative name.* 



* In these considerations I find myself able largely to reconcile what has 

 always been regarded as a contradiction between ilu- views of Professor Whitney 



